Posted on 06/18/2007 8:24:20 AM PDT by BillCompton
Remember in January when the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its good friends in media trumpeted that 2006 was the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States?
NOAA based that finding - which allegedly capped a nine-year warming streak "unprecedented in the historical record" - on the daily temperature data that its National Climatic Data Center gathers from about 1,221 mostly rural weather observation stations around the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
Not surprising. I am sure there are even some intentional pumping of the data by individual volunteers with an agenda. Other countries are even worse than the US. satellite data is the best source of information on global temps.
100 years ago, California only had one indoor toilet. It was in the Governors Mansion in Sacramento.
So while we could not invent flushing toilets until then, we were previously able to develop highly technical weather monitoring equipment.
Yea, right.
Follow the money. Who has a vested interest in global warming? Who’s grants from the feds depend on a new crisis to study and perpetuate?
Hey, thanks for the link.
What kills me is when they report on the Web and on T.V. a relative humidity reading of 69% in the middle of a thunderstorm with near-zero visibity due to rain; these machines are also not very smart.
Between the ranges of 41F and 120+F, the traditional mercury bulb thermometer remains extremely accurate when read by a competent observer; the modern machines are designed to be self-calibrating and there word is gospel.
The WBAN manual lists the requirements for the location, design and construction of a classic instrument shelter in the (then) interests of uniform measuring procedures; since the advent and adoption of the automated units all that is largely ignored.
there-their, sorry.
“when read by a competent observer;”
I don’t doubt this to be true, was the training done after a full day of riding horses and trying to find food and water to eat?
It is interesting to note that "Average temperature" will change consideraby based upon whether the daily low and daily high are averaged together, hourly readings are taken, and what time of day the readings are taken. These have all changed considerably over the last few years.
I've seen some initial tests suggesting a large difference in temperature readings between the testing stations painted with whitewash, and painted with white latex paint. This in addition to the stations that sit adjacent to parking lots that weren't there a decade before.
at least in a few cases, "rural" has changed from a field in the middle of nowhere, to within a foot of a parking space along a large parking lot with sidewalks and buildings.
You might recall here in CA where our “official” rain fall meter was used. After weeks of rain it still measured minimal increase in annual rain measurement. After weeks of searching, it was determined that the unit was leaking.
OK. What does that do to statistics.
surfacestations.org is currently offline due to excessive traffic, it will return once server is relocated
please bookmark and try again in 24-48 hours
Coincidence? I don't think so.
He only got it up to 1000 degrees, half of what was expected.
Of course, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the volcanologist reading the pyrometer a few feet away.
Granted, Rowe was told not to hold it in one spot so it wouldn't pull an excalibur, but he was pretty wimpily incompetent about trying to get a good reading.
Hey, the lava's only 2000 degrees, only a tad more compared to the thermometers next to heat exhausts, burn barrels, jet wash, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.